AT THE HEART OF THE ROAD TRANSPORT INDUSTRY.

Call our Sales Team on 0208 912 2120

Eastbourne Conference

16th May 1947, Page 44
16th May 1947
Page 44
Page 46
Page 44, 16th May 1947 — Eastbourne Conference
Close
Noticed an error?
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.

Which of the following most accurately describes the problem?

Keywords : Conductor

CONSIDERED from every aspect, the Eastbourne Conference of the Public Transport Association was one of the most successful it has held. Last week we gave a résumé of the two papers. Each of these contributions led to an animated discussion. In connection with Mr. D. M. Sinclair's, "The Future Development of the Public Service Vehicle." the following remarks were made:— Mr. E. R. L. Fitzpayne (Glasgow Corporation Transport) disagreed with conductors having seats and contemplated even dispensing with the conductor to counter rising labour costs. He criticized certain accessories, and particularly the unsightliness of newspapers being used to blank off radiators in cold weather. In America, there were efforts to ensure long mileages between overhauls, and often 200,000 miles were run before a rebore. He was considering the American practice of replacing the sump .oil nightly, Chromium plating of the top rings was claimed to reduce corrosive wear. He thought that we should eventually adopt the single-deck vehicle exclusively.

Alderman i H Whitaker (Todmor

den) thought that abolishing the doubledecker would increase costs and fares.

Mr. W. 13ramham (Eastern CoachWorks, Ltd.) called for more standees on short runs. He thought there was no evidence that the chassisIess vehicle was superior to the orthodox, and he asked for research into the possibilities of the articulated type. He endorsed the plea for closer co-operation betWeen operators and manufaettirers.

Mr. C. F. klapper believed the double-decker had a useful place in city transport, but suggested the development of an under-floor design. He also advocated a universal service-numbers system to avoid competing operators using the same numbers for different routes.

Mr. W. J. Evans (Reading Corporation Transport) thought that most of the improvements suggested for buses had already been embodied in trolleybuses. He hoped • the refusal to sanction two-axle, 30-ft. single-deckers would be the subject of further negotiation, Mr. G. E. Liardet (Simms Motor Units, ltd.) urged consultation with accessory makers at an early stage in vehicle design. At the last moment, the accessory maker was expected to provide a product of high performance, low cost, occupying no space, having no weight, and capable of 100,000 miles without any attention. He mentioned an improved 7-in, dynamo, which his concern had designed as a standard. For this he had received no orders, but was required to provide 66 variations.

Mr. F. G. Parnell (Automotive Products, Ltd.) favoured the abolition of the double-decker, and suggested that thehand brake should operate on the transmission.

Councillor J. Rafferty (Leeds City Transport) visualized enormous congestion in a city like Leeds if only singledeckers were employed. There would also be great expense in providing garage space. He ,described as "poppy cock" much. of the information coming

from Atnerica .this subject, and• claimed that we had led, and continued to lead, the world in this sphere.

Mr. A. A. Jackson (Bolton Corpora, tion Transport) was also disposed. to retain the double-decker. In America, 30-40 standees were allowed in singledeckers; this was unlikely to be permitted here. He asked for greater standardization and interchangeability of engines and other units as between different makes of chassis. He suggested the possibility of using two smal' under-floor engines working together.

Major F. I. Chapple, D.S.0: (Bristol Tramways and Carriage Co., Ltd.), spoke of the hampering effects of regh, lations. It was their legal interpretation which caused so much difficulty.

• Better accommodation for driver and conductor should be provided in new designs. Doors were necessary on some routes and at certain times. The chassisless vehicle must be insulated from road shocks, the ideal being independent suspension for each wheel.

Mr. C. R. Tattam (Bradford Corporation Transport) said there existed three live bodies to promote co-operation between operators and makers. These were the Technical Panel of the P.T.A., the Omnibus Committee of the M.P.T.A. and the Vehicle Committee of the S.ivi.M.T. They would soon be issuing a joint report dealing with the oil-engined chassis from the standardi zation viewpoint.

Mr. G. Mackenzie Junner raised some points concerning safety, and asked whether the author considered the under-body type better in this respect. As there were two schools of thought regarding single and double-:

deckers, he suggested the possibility of a vehicle with a convertible body. Many serious injuries were cansed at low speed by locked from wheels sliding instead of rolling over victims. If the brakes, on these could be instantly and automatically released there would be less damage.

Mr. D. M. Denbo1m (Norris, Henty and Gardners, Ltd.) said that a 10-litre engine had a high fuel consumption and lower economy. The cast-iron crankcase was not the answer to broken crankshafts, and more iesearch was necessary.

Concerning the paper, "Commonsense in Road Transport," by Mr. E. L. Taylor, Mr. Fitzpayne thought that the time was approaching when there must be amalgamation between the two bodies controlling wages and conditions for the companies and municipalities. There should be one authority for the industry. As regards staff, there was great difficulty, both in obtaining and retaining it, and consideration must be given to taking boys from school and training them. In the past, transport had been the Cinderella of the planner,. and, in many cases, was segregated from a city centre. He advocated radio control between central offices, inspectors and staff generally. Mr. (Clapper claimed that there is now no justification for workmen's fares.

Mr. W. Luff (Blackpool Corporation Transport) considered that nationalization, would introduce many complexities. He thought it unnecessary to have a great conglomeration of statistics, and wondered whether engineers really understood the figures made out for their benefit.

Mr. S. J. Patmore said those compelled to travel later were paying double fares to subsidize earlier travellers who were probably better off.

Mr. A. Morrison (Northern Ireland Road Transport) said the peak on his system was on Saturday afternoons, and that workmen's traffic was not the most expensive for which to cater. The Board did all it could to encourage the use of season tickets.

Mr. C. Bullock (Brush Coachwork, Ltd.) said that not more than 3,000 new buses were produced in the year ended March 31, 1946, against the normal annual replacement of 6,000. During the war the accumulated obsolescence amounted to about 30,000. Thus the coachbuilding industry had a long way to go before it could catch up with ordinary replacements.

Councillor Rafferty regarded work

men's fares to-day as an anomaly. He suggested the appointment of a personnel relations officer in all transport undertakings. He did not agree with the approach of the industry's technical journals to nationalization, but was satisfied that they could make a real contribution towards the betterment of the industry. Whether run nationally or through private companies, the aim should be a job well done in the service of the community.

Mr. Jackson maintained that smart vehicles justified the extra expense involved, in that they induced additional traffic. We should not be too rigid as regards depreciation. Vehicles should be written off within a reasonable period.

Mr. Junner thought the industry made insufficient use of its trade and technical Press from what he termed the national . aspect. Government Departments sent many communications when it desired to have certain ideas put forward, but the industry, as a whole, was wanting in this respect. Mr. J. B. Parker (Aldershot and Dis. trict Traction Co., Ltd.) said that in his undertaking all passengers had to pay the same fare for the equivalent distance, and he urged that all fares should be arranged on this basis.


comments powered by Disqus